Home > ABC Cheers 'Laudable' Candy Crowley for Propping Up Obama in Debate

ABC Cheers 'Laudable' Candy Crowley for Propping Up Obama in Debate

By

Scott Whitlock

October 22, 2012 - 11:57am

ABC analyst Matthew Dowd on Sunday cheered the "laudable" Candy Crowley
for propping up Barack Obama with wrong information about Libya during
last week's debate. Referring to a contentious exchange between the
President and Mitt Romney over when the White House called the attack a
terrorist indicent, Dowd enthused, "...What Candy Crowley did, I
actually thought, was laudable, because what happens in this whole
thing is the truth becomes a casualty." [MP3 audio here[1].]

Dowd, appearing on This Week, lamented a media culture where
"we're just supposed to make accusations back and forth to each other
and nobody's supposed to correct and say, 'by the way, that's not
true.'"

Of course, Obama did not initially call[2] the violence in Benghazi a terrorist attack." As the Washington Times explained, he "used the word 'terror' exactly once, late in his [September 12th Rose Garden] address."

"No acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this great nation,
alter that character, or eclipse the light of the values that we stand
for." From the context, it was clear that his reference to "terror" was
general. Not once did he apply that characterization to Benghazi.

Yet Dowd hyped Crowley: "I hope we get to do more of that in this discourse."

When a debate moderator exceeds his or her role and inserts bad
information into an exchange, it's hardly "laudable." The panelist, who often appears on Good Morning America, has recently sounded to the left of Democratic aide turned
journalist George Stephanopoulos.

In
his political career, Dowd worked for both Democrats and
Republicans. On Sunday, he threw his previous boss, George W. Bush,
under the bus:

DOWD: We had a president in an administration for years made an
argument about weapons of mass destruction for years. Now we've lost
thousands of lives over in Iraq based on a false assumption. It wasn't
two weeks. This was months and months and months of a conversation where
we never got the right answer to this.

The above clip was featured on Monday's Starting Point by the liberal Soledad O'Brien, a sure sign Dowd has pleased the media establishment.
On Wednesday[4], Dowd declared that the conservative complaint about Crowley is a "sure sign that President Obama won this" debate.

A transcript of the October 21 exchange follows:

10:31

GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS: But there could be another flash point on the
issue of Benghazi. It did create a moment between Governor Romney and
the President the other night. Let's take a look.

MITT ROMNEY: You said in the Rose Garden the day after the attack it
was an act of terror? It was not a spontanious demonstration? Is that
what you're saying?

BARACK OBAMA: Please proceed, Governor.

ROMNEY: I want to make sure we get that for the record, because it
took the President 14 days before he called the attack in Benghazi an
act of terror.

OBAMA: Get the transcript.

CANDY CROWLEY: He did, in fact, sir.

STEPHANOPOULOS: Greta Van Susteren, Candy Crowley stepping in there help the President.

GRETA VAN SUSTEREN: Well, actually I think she helped Governor Romney.
Candy Crowley, by the way, is an old friend of mine, I used to work at
CNN. But I actually think she helped Governor Romney, because is there
about 15 or 16 topics they discussed that night, and the most important
issue for Governor Romney's campaign is to put the spotlight on Libya
and how the President's administration has been very clumsy at best, not
giving us the information, meaning the American people, what happened.

So what happened is because Candy Crowley was clumsy in how she
handled it, the entire discussion and even right now is about Libya
where we would have probably reserved it for the debate tomorrow night.
But Candy, in an unusual, bizarre way put the total spotlight -- that's
all the media talked about.

STEPHANOPOULOS: Do you agree with that?

MATTHEW DOWD: No. Absolutely not. I mean, I think that Benghazi
discussion, Libya discussion was the President's best moment of the
debate and I think Mitt Romney's worst moment in that debate. And I have
to say so many times in this discourse that we have - and Candy - what
Candy Crowley did, I actually thought, was laudable, because what
happens in this whole thing is the truth becomes a casualty. And nobody
is supposed to say what actually - what actually happened, we're just
supposed to make accusations back and forth to each other and nobody's
supposed to correct and say, by the way, that's not true. I actually
thought what Candy Crowley did, and I hope we get to do more of that in
this discourse.

-- Scott Whitlock is the senior news analyst for the Media Research Center. Click here[5] to follow him on Twitter.

Federal employees and military personnel can donate to the Media Research Center through the Combined Federal Campaign or CFC. To donate to the MRC, use CFC #12489. Visit the CFC website for more information about giving opportunities in your workplace.